Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer. (Login to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution.

Theymos just removed me from merit source, That is such an instant action by theymos I mean. Any other case where there is such an instant action, even after sufficient proves are provided by us?

Why don't we see such immediate changes when we have already provided enough proves about DT merit-cycle, all of that also comes under trust abuse and should be handled by theymos instantly as my case was.

I think this is partiality in judgment and this also stopped us form having a merit giver for people under abuse. Cryptohunter is posting a large amount of content from months here, if trust system and merit system was working correctly his efforts in posting should have received many numbers of merits for him to become a Lambo member here.

I see your Negative trust. It's wrong and i don't agree with it. Like i have said before i don't agree with some things Lauda does or says. You have to understand most of these DT Members have ZERO life outside of BCT and want to play superhero on here...This is what they do. This is what makes them relevant iin the world. Their red paint means they want attentiion and are screaming for help.

No person their right mind spends 8-10 hours a day on a forum judging peoples posts and leaving negative feedback is in their right minds.

They are abusive losers and it can't be fixed until theymos puts his foot down and say enough.

Tolerate it if you can uuntil the system breaks or theymos comes to his right mind and fixes it.

I hope you are right. Theymos has made one good step lately and that is more or less to tell them that unless someone is scamming or trying to scam then leave them alone to enjoy their freedom of expression and freedom to have their own opinions.

I hope these persons will follow his advice or else he really does push through custom trust lists for every person here with no such thing as DT

thanks for encouraging words.

No problem....Just because they have RED paint....Doesn't make them right. Keep fighting.

I see your Negative trust. It's wrong and i don't agree with it. Like i have said before i don't agree with some things Lauda does or says. You have to understand most of these DT Members have ZERO life outside of BCT and want to play superhero on here...This is what they do. This is what makes them relevant iin the world. Their red paint means they want attentiion and are screaming for help.

No person their right mind spends 8-10 hours a day on a forum judging peoples posts and leaving negative feedback is in their right minds.

They are abusive losers and it can't be fixed until theymos puts his foot down and say enough.

Tolerate it if you can uuntil the system breaks or theymos comes to his right mind and fixes it.

Which is more important in your endeavor, a net-positive outcome for the forum and community, or removing Lauda from DT? Taking a look through all of the people you're seeking to exclude, you're going to be doing a LOT of damage if you are successful. I'm just wondering if you believe the ends justify the means?

You are assuming that Lauda being on DT is a net positive for the forum. You are wrong.

Lauda has given over 4,000 negative ratings, which is a lot. However the appropriate use of a negative rating is to warn others that trading with the person will likely result in a scam attempt against you. This does not apply to nearly all of the ratings that Lauda has left, the overwhelming majority of the negative ratings Lauda has left are in relation to someone having a bunch of alt accounts, someone posting "poorly", or someone "breaking forum rules", none of which have anything to do with the chances of being able to successfully trading with the person.

The above abuse of the trust system by Lauda actually hurt the community, and safety of the forum marketplace in many ways:

It takes a long pattern of poor posting to get banned from the forum, however once someone receives a negative rating, they will often abandon their account in favor of a new account, delaying any potential ban. A ban includes a prohibition from creating a new account that can (and is) enforced via means that will catch almost all instances of ban evasion, while an arbitrary negative rating will have no such effect

Many innocent people have been effectively excluded from the marketplace for arbitrary reasons

Actual scammers are able to continue stealing from others, even after they receive a negative trust warning because they can claim they received negative ratings unfairly or for reasons other than the ability to be trusted

There are no clear "rules" someone can follow to avoid receiving an arbitrary negative ratings, the result of which is corruption

I am not a big fan of having "strangers" and others who have little/no trading history in trust lists and/or the DT network, and as such, I cannot endorse the stance of the OP. Many who the OP is suggesting to include in trust lists are people I don't necessarily think are best to be in the position of the amount of power/influence of DT.

what business is it of lauda to run a sting operationis lauda the police ?<snip>why should lauda care if he paid his taxes on his crypto ?

From what I've read, that whole thing wasn't ultimately about taxes and the signed message from Lauda prior to the operation explains what they were doing. It was ill-advised for them to do that, especially as Lauda was a staff member at the time, and he/she even admits that. I think that's also why Lauda got removed as a staff member, but I did not see this as a true extortion attempt, especially coming from Quickseller. Those two have been feuding since forever.

As far as the harassment goes, that's an assertion that I've never seen evidence for. I'd tend to agree that threatening via telephone is a really bad idea, but I don't think I have all the facts to make a judgement on that. I don't know what was said or if any such phone call was ever made. I don't even really understand what the whole sting operation was supposed to be about other than the suspicion that zeroxal was involved in some criminal activity.

That is a ridiculous assertion on both fronts. I challenge you to find someone who has claimed I have stolen or misappropriated funds (that is not later shown to be baseless) -- I will save you the time, no such claim exists. (I await your apology when you agree no such claim exists).

Of course the whole "sting operation" was not ultimately about taxes. It was about the fact someone was known to have a large amount of bitcoin worth hundreds of thousands of dollars and few living expenses. Paying any extortion bounty is not even evidence of wrongdoing, it is evidence the stopping of the threatened criminal harassment and probable hassle of an IRS audit is worth more than value of the bounty.

The signed message was also not a signed message, it was the claimed content of an encrypted message (lauda knew the difference at the time) that was posted to multiple pastebin websites in order to create the appearance of an alibi if/when he was called out on the extortion attempt. It would be impossible to ever see the "signed message" if it was not presented and decrypted. If the extortion bounty was paid, it is almost a certainty lauda would not have been called out on the extortion, and there would be no reason to ever present that "signed message". There could even be more "signed messages" out that that are similarly encrypted that say something different that would be presented if the extortion was paid and lauda was called out -- we can never know one way or another.

what business is it of lauda to run a sting operationis lauda the police ?<snip>why should lauda care if he paid his taxes on his crypto ?

From what I've read, that whole thing wasn't ultimately about taxes and the signed message from Lauda prior to the operation explains what they were doing. It was ill-advised for them to do that, especially as Lauda was a staff member at the time, and he/she even admits that. I think that's also why Lauda got removed as a staff member, but I did not see this as a true extortion attempt, especially coming from Quickseller. Those two have been feuding since forever.

As far as the harassment goes, that's an assertion that I've never seen evidence for. I'd tend to agree that threatening via telephone is a really bad idea, but I don't think I have all the facts to make a judgement on that. I don't know what was said or if any such phone call was ever made. I don't even really understand what the whole sting operation was supposed to be about other than the suspicion that zeroxal was involved in some criminal activity.

That is a ridiculous assertion on both fronts. I challenge you to find someone who has claimed I have stolen or misappropriated funds (that is not later shown to be baseless) -- I will save you the time, no such claim exists. (I await your apology when you agree no such claim exists).

Of course the whole "sting operation" was not ultimately about taxes. It was about the fact someone was known to have a large amount of bitcoin worth hundreds of thousands of dollars and few living expenses. Paying any extortion bounty is not even evidence of wrongdoing, it is evidence the stopping of the threatened criminal harassment and probable hassle of an IRS audit is worth more than value of the bounty.

The signed message was also not a signed message, it was the claimed content of an encrypted message (lauda knew the difference at the time) that was posted to multiple pastebin websites in order to create the appearance of an alibi if/when he was called out on the extortion attempt. It would be impossible to ever see the "signed message" if it was not presented and decrypted. If the extortion bounty was paid, it is almost a certainty lauda would not have been called out on the extortion, and there would be no reason to ever present that "signed message". There could even be more "signed messages" out that that are similarly encrypted that say something different that would be presented if the extortion was paid and lauda was called out -- we can never know one way or another.

today i made many signed messages completely absolving me of any possible crime i may commit in the future through my actions to bust scammers or help anyone ever

I don't think that's helping your "cause". What happened to using arguments to include/exclude someone?

you have us on ignorewhy should we trust you ?lauda thinks you support him has you on his list i agreei dont see any of your circled merits voting for our causeyou ever speak out against lauda ?switzerland cult member

There is no "us" on my ignore list, it's individual users. Most of them are cheaters from the time I was running giveaways, only recently I've added a troll. Not "all of you" as you claim.

Quote

why should we trust you ?

That's up to you to decide. I couldn't care less if you don't trust me, but you're missing my point: you should make your own judgements based on the actions you see from people. Or at least: that's how I've created my trust list.

Quote

lauda thinks you support him has you on his list i agree

So does OgNasty. OgNasty and Lauda don't trust each other, and yet, they both trust my judgement.

Quote

i dont see any of your circled merits voting for our cause

I don't Merit users for voting power. I Merit users for posts that are worth reading.

cryptohunters good posts arent worth reading to youyou reinforce the cultcryptohunters posts are trash to you you are against us

I like Switzerland. She is one of the few people on DT doing the right things. There are hardly any complaints about her ratings. I'd say leave her be, no-one is perfect. She should be free to support whomever she pleases. Haranguing her is something Lauda would do. Joining "la résistancee" should be by choice.

EDIT: This is my honest opinion and not an attempt to kiss arse for positive ratings and merit. Frankly, they are wasted on me.

I don't think that's helping your "cause". What happened to using arguments to include/exclude someone?

Well you have included untrustworthy individuals on your trust list rendering you untrustworthy. Also you are often found protecting them and others in arguments and debates where they are resisting a fairer system that will ensure the equal treatment of all members.

You also seek to defame persons as trolls but then when challenged can not present one thing that they have said that is not correct. Their posts are not trolling those are fact based posts that are delivered with the highly charged indignation of a person whom has been trust abused that you have sanctioned and therefore also makes you a trust abuser.

You may not be as bad as some of the others but you display lots of undesirable traits from the perspective of those seeking a fair and equal treatment for all members here.

You are just offended because after you were religiously trying to crush the truth that merit is being cycled you were demonstrated by myself to employ broken logic and make stupid statements. One has only got to view those meta threads regarding merit to see your mind is incapable of sensible debate. I therefore correctly pointed out that such a fragile mind is simply unable to produce contributions that justify such a ludicrous amount of merits heaped upon it when there are other legends making posts that dwarf any capability you have and have less than 80 merits.

This was simply truth that offended your ego and now you are constantly popping up sniping at our honest and commendable cause to bring into place a fairer and more transparent criteria for the systems of control than the ones you have so far been able to benefit from.

I do not say that you are as bad as some of the others but still you have done more than enough to demonstrate you seek to maintain the status quo that benefits you over the introduction of system that ensures fair and equal treatment for all and guards against trust abuse and the crushing of free speech.

I can provide evidence to substantiate what I have posted if you wish for it.

We only want a fair and transparent system here. Stop trying to prevent this.

LoyceV likes to challenge others but will never meet a challenge you set him.

This post is a VERY important post regarding the original purpose of this forum and where it has been heading recently.. go read it and either provide a facts based refutation or else start heaping the merits on it that is rightfully deserves. It is actually a disgrace that a post trying to provide a faux and empty rebuttal to such an important contribution gets more merits than the important message it fails to refute.

Is it worth reading or about crypto?Yeah it really deserves 80 merits and seeing the tons of posts from people doing real quality posts here getting ZERO is absolutly justified.I guess the whole community should read this thread since its according to you worth reading it and with 80 merits i guess the most important thread of the month.

Of course its not merit whoring which DT members should prevent

And to say it more clearly i didn't saw a single word from you to Lauda,The Pharmacist,Timelord or any other DT member asking why they have double standards on tagging.Buddies don't get tagged and always get a justification they don't deserve a tagg.People like me get dozens of taggs because i raised my opinion.But when asking for showing proof of their claims like for example i'm an alt of QS they are all silent.

WHERE ARE YOU THERE ?Never saw you demand replies from these DT members for something they did.NEVER!!!!!!

More important theymos officaly said that tagging for this thread is not allowed.Still i got 5 taggs because of that.You think they even consider taking this tagg away ?NOOOThe only option to take that tagg away would be adding instantly another one for any new found bullshit reason.These taggs are not because i scammed someone or because i'm going to scam someone these taggs are because they don't like me.Actually hate me and they will keep tagging for anything just to discredit me like they did with every other member who didn't played under their own made rules.

WHERE ARE YOU THEN ?I SEE YOU NOT ASKING THESE DT MEMBERS WHY THEY BREAK THEIR OWN RULES ?

Here just for you

All taggs not allowed by theymos.Why don't you ask them why they don't remove it ?

And you ask why we don't have you in our trust list ?The reason is you are giving silent permission to that kind of abuse.

Where were you when these faggots instantly tried to defame that screenshot about suchmoon ?Why do you think they do so ?Why you think it took so long for suchmoon to reply on that thread ?Everyone instantly talking about fake evidence.

FUCK YOU the evidence is 100% accurate and what they did is trying to instantly intimidate you with text like banning your account for that so you step back.You think they didn't do instantly the same to that guy ?

You think suchmoon would just come and say "ohhh yes thats me how i scammed someone"

You guys are clearly not neutral but one sided.Thats the issuePeople have no trust in DT members,moderators and even to theymos .SOrry to say it this way but thats the truth and seeing theymos actions where he favours very often DT members or ignores their open abuse is something i can more and more understand these people being silent if your business is relaying mainly on this forum and your account health.

So fuck yourself for the fear community you created that noone is being trusted to get this kind of information directly because everyone fears the consequence of publishing it.

I talked with several DT members and even with a Mod i trust.Only one fucking mod i trust on this board and you know what their answers basicly were : Nobody seems to care

I'm not going to blacklist people from DT selection due to not following my views, since a big point of this new system is to get me less involved,

Just for you

Quote

It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them. I'm disappointed in the reaction to this post. Although H8bussesNbicycles is perhaps not particularly trustworthy for other reasons, the reasons many people gave for neg-trusting him are inappropriate. You can argue that what he's advocating is bad on a utilitarian level, but he would disagree, and his advocacy of a certain Trust philosophy doesn't by itself mean that he's an untrustworthy person. DT selection is meant to be affected by user lists, and it is totally legitimate to try to honestly convince other (real) people to use a list more in-line with your views.

I'm not going to blacklist people from DT selection due to not following my views, since a big point of this new system is to get me less involved,

quote the entire thing and stop being untrustworthythe full post goes on to say if DT do not largely follow its intended purpose then boom no more DT and everyone needs to set up their own trust list which is a far better idea anyway

"I'm not going to blacklist people from DT selection due to not following my views, since a big point of this new system is to get me less involved, but if a culture somewhat compatible with my views does not eventually develop, then I will consider this more freeform DT selection to be a failure, and I'll probably get rid of it in favor of enforcing custom trust lists." theymos full post